Case Note & Summary
The testamentary suit originated from a petition filed by the son of the deceased seeking Letters of Administration with the Will dated 20 March 1980. The deceased, Khanchand Jhangiani, a Hindu, left a holograph Will allegedly signed by him and attested by two witnesses, R.B. Hirani and Dr. K.R. Chandiramani, both of whom had died by the time of the petition. The plaintiff, an ex-naval officer, claimed the Will was in the deceased's handwriting and that his wife was present at the execution. The defendant, the deceased's married daughter residing in England, filed a caveat, converting the petition into a suit. She challenged the Will on multiple grounds: it was not a proper Will, there were suspicious circumstances, it was procured by coercion and undue influence, the deceased was not in full senses, the attesting witnesses did not validly attest, and the plaintiff had manipulated the deceased. The court framed issues on 4 February 2014, including whether the Will was validly executed and attested, whether it was obtained by undue influence, and the plaintiff's entitlement to probate. The plaintiff examined four witnesses, including his wife and the son of one attesting witness, while the defendant testified herself. The court, after hearing arguments, answered all issues against the plaintiff. It held that the plaintiff failed to prove due execution and attestation under Section 69 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, as the handwriting of at least one attesting witness was not proved. The defendant successfully established the presence of suspicious circumstances—such as the exclusion of the wife and daughter, the advanced age of the deceased, and manipulation—which the plaintiff did not dispel. Further, the defendant proved that the Will was obtained by coercion and undue influence. Consequently, the suit was dismissed, and the plaintiff was not granted Letters of Administration. The judgment reinforced the principle that a propounder must strictly prove the execution and attestation of a Will and remove all suspicious circumstances surrounding it, especially when primary evidence is unavailable.
Headnote
A) Testamentary Law - Due Execution of Will - Proof of Attestation when Attesting Witnesses Dead - Indian Succession Act, 1925, Section 63; Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Section 69 - The plaintiff sought to prove a holograph Will dated 20th March 1980, but both attesting witnesses were deceased. Under Section 69, he needed to prove the handwriting of at least one attesting witness, which he failed to do. The court held that the plaintiff did not prove due execution and attestation as required by law. (Paras 17, 19) B) Testamentary Law - Suspicious Circumstances - Removal of Suspicious Circumstances - Indian Succession Act, 1925 - The defendant raised several suspicious circumstances, including the advanced age of the deceased, exclusion of wife and daughter, mental capacity, and manipulation. The propounder must remove all suspicious circumstances. Held that the plaintiff failed to dispel the suspicious circumstances surrounding the Will, rendering it invalid. (Paras 15, 17) C) Testamentary Law - Undue Influence and Coercion - Will Obtained by Undue Influence - Indian Succession Act, 1925 - The defendant proved that the Will was procured under coercion and undue influence. Evidence showed harassment of parents by plaintiff's wife and manipulation. Held that the Will was not a result of free agency and was liable to be rejected. (Paras 17)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Will dated 20th March, 1980 is the last Will and Testament of late Khanchand Tekchand Jhangiani, validly executed and attested under Section 63 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, and whether the propounder (plaintiff) has discharged the burden of proving due execution and removing suspicious circumstances.
Final Decision
Testamentary Suit No.183 of 2013 is dismissed. Plaintiff fails to prove due execution and attestation of the Will dated 20th March 1980; defendant proves undue influence; plaintiff not entitled to probate. Issues answered in Negative/Affirmative accordingly.
Law Points
- Proof of will under Section 63 of Indian Succession Act
- 1925
- Attestation under Section 69 of Indian Evidence Act
- 1872 when attesting witnesses dead
- Removal of suspicious circumstances by propounder
- Burden to prove due execution and attestation
- Undue influence vitiates will
- Requirement of two attesting witnesses
